There were a lot of those rigs around in the years following WW II, when there still was a "Radio Row"! And a BC-348 is a BIG step up from an S38C. I had the use of one for a while. Long, long ago! 7
Thanks, Richard! Yes, that's exactly the paper I was trying to remember for Dale Long HH2/N3BNA last evening. In my "senior moment" I couldn't remember it late in the evening. Perhaps it was you that
No doubt! Charlie, K4OTV --Original Message-- From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Merv Schweigert Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 2:08 PM To: topband@contesting.com S
FB! Merv! Reminds me of years ago, when I worked Jacky, 3B8CF from here in NC on the very first antenna that I ever built for 160 - an inverted L! Seemed that I was the only one hearing him, although
BTW - that was just before my sunset! 73, Charlie, K4OTV FB! Merv! Reminds me of years ago, when I worked Jacky, 3B8CF from here in NC on the very first antenna that I ever built for 160 - an inverte
Well, it seems to me, that something that is being overlooked in this discussion, is that for, many of us, buried radials are not an option. In my case, I have bedrock that comes pretty much right up
WOW! FB!, Jorge! That's quite an accomplishment!! Especially from where you are!! 73, Charlie, K4OTV Hello Nice to found today my last LOTW confirmation for WAS LOTW on topband Jack WA7LNW confirmed
If I had copied/worked an HS0 on Topband -even from the west coast, I believe that, even at my age, I'd remember his call! 73, Charlie, K4OTV Bob, it should be HS0ZKX or HS0ZEE but in contest is QRV
I generally agree with you, Bob - especially with regard to not grounding the far ends of 1/4 wave radials!! After all what we are trying to establish is a low-impedance "image plane" for the vertica
True, I expect, Carl. Just don't ground it! If you think about it, a more-or-less ideal "image - plane" for the vertical would be a circular metallic sheet a 1/2 wave in diameter ( although "infinite
Yes. And the operative words there are "along its length" - very different from grounding at its end! The nastiest, and most difficult case to model and analyze is the case of "radials" laid on the g
But why "ground" the end of a bare buried radial that's already buried in the ground?? Probably be more effective to just soak the area with Calcium Chloride or something! A radial network of elevate
Hi Jorge! Well, 160m WAS is tough from here in the USA! So MUCH more difficult from Uruguay!! You must have a really excellent 160m station and antennas! Very impressive! I also visited your excellen
All true, of course. Aside from the rocky condition of my lot, one of the main reasons that I rely on elevated radials is that I can model those antennas handily and I get good measurable results tha
By the way, Tom A 40 m 1/4 wave over 4 elevated radials should be a really good performer. I built one that was a good match into Asia and other "faraway places" when compared to my full-size 1/2 wav
Well, I'm sure that was no small feat, Mike and for Jorge to have done it from Uruguay is impressive to me. 73, Charlie, K4OTV I've worked all states on 160 including DC, but I can't (and don't care
Amen! Charlie, K4OTV Some of the longest most drawn-out debates (and fights) come from dealing with how much is good, how much is OK, or how much is bad. It goes on and on with everything until our h
The primary additive in stainless steel is chromium - not nickel. There are some stainless steels that do not contain nickel at all and there are non-magnetic stainless steels. Another common additiv
I expect that most of the offending nickel at VHF/UHF sites is nickel plating on less expensive connectors where it is used in place of more expensive silver alloys. Ch;arlie, K4OTV The primary addit
FB Merv!! Indeed it was "one of those times"! Charlie, K4OTV --Original Message-- From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Björn SM0MDG Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2014 10:47